Is it legal to create loops with arpegiattors?

[ghettosynth]

ghettosynth - I'm not really interested in argueing the whole concept with a lawyer, or you. I just don't see the point in sampling someone else's work for my own, why bother getting up in the morning. Legally or otherwise, that's my only concern, my work, my life, my interest in doing what I do.

But you miss the point completely. Your work is derivative. You do not develop synthesizers, and if you did, you most likely don't create programming languages to create synthesizers, and if you did, you probably don't design computers to run the programming languages, and if you did, you probably are not a physicist or materials scientist developing the semiconductor technology necessary to build the computers...

Relying on a tool to create a piece of work makes the work a derivative of the tool? That's an entirely new definition of derivative I've never seen argued anywhere before.

I'm not using derivative here in the legal sense, rather the lay sense. Perhaps a different choice would avoid confusion.

The analogy is really clear. A preset library is clearly a derivative work, in the non-legal sense that it depends on the creativity of others, in the same way that using an arp preset to create a loop is a derivative work. We aren't talking about using an arp+synth preset, simply an arp preset. In other words, it's a selection of rules that determine which notes should play and in what order when one holds down keys.

You are simply using some aspect of the work others as a starting point for your own creativity. You wouldn't get very far with your preset library if the synth didn't exist.

[ghettosynth]

FYI: Here's a much more balanced discussion which seems to err more on the side of "presets are not copyrightable."

http://www.soundonsound.com/forum/showf ... art=1&vc=1

[Nighthawk77]

I have some question about creating commercial loops for sale. Is it legal to create a loop with a arpeggiator + synth, so two vsts and use a preset of arpeggiator to triger the synth? Or do you must use a modified preset? what about synth presets that allready have arpeggiator presets? Can you use this to create loops? I realy don' know what is allowed and what not.... I have heard some loops on the market which are made of presets of synths i know.

generally, dont make samples of synth presets that you didnt make yourself, arperggiated or not.

Good point!

[ghettosynth]

generally, dont make samples of synth presets that you didnt make yourself, arperggiated or not.

why not ?
sounds themselves cannot be copyrighted, not even rhythms or chord progressions.
melodies however, can.

Thinking about this more, unless your arp preset plays only a fixed melody, perhaps transposed, I don't think that it can be any more subject to copyright than a synth patch.

Even with such a preset, it must be triggered and I'm not convinced that the courts will view this as a song or composition. It's not sold as that, it's sold very much like a synth preset. Does anyone know of case law regarding anything close, tiny midi files, for example?

The SOS discussion that I linked mentioned an attempt by a DX7 patch designer to assert claims and lost, does anyone know about this specifically?

[ghettosynth]

I have some question about creating commercial loops for sale. Is it legal to create a loop with a arpeggiator + synth, so two vsts and use a preset of arpeggiator to triger the synth? Or do you must use a modified preset? what about synth presets that allready have arpeggiator presets? Can you use this to create loops? I realy don' know what is allowed and what not.... I have heard some loops on the market which are made of presets of synths i know.

generally, dont make samples of synth presets that you didnt make yourself, arperggiated or not.

Good point!

No, it isn't a good point. The question is about legality, and regardless what you think of making samples of synth presets, AFAIK, unless we're talking about presets with samples, there is absolutely nothing illegal about it.

Further, the OP is clearly talking simply about the arp preset only, not the synth preset.

[Hink]

I have some question about creating commercial loops for sale. Is it legal to create a loop with a arpeggiator + synth, so two vsts and use a preset of arpeggiator to triger the synth? Or do you must use a modified preset? what about synth presets that allready have arpeggiator presets? Can you use this to create loops? I realy don' know what is allowed and what not.... I have heard some loops on the market which are made of presets of synths i know.

generally, dont make samples of synth presets that you didnt make yourself, arperggiated or not.

Good point!

No, it isn't a good point. The question is about legality, and regardless what you think of making samples of synth presets, AFAIK, unless we're talking about presets with samples, there is absolutely nothing illegal about it.

Further, the OP is clearly talking simply about the arp preset only, not the synth preset.

I agree with gs, but I agree with WR as well. As far as legal, I think gs is right but when it comes down to my own ways I learn from presets (for synths, fx, sims etc I do not go near presets) and tweak them. An arp is an arp, they put it in the software and many arps are limited in the pattern so why buy an expensive synth and be told you cannot use the arp? My best example is YT Indy with it's arp, why bother if people cannot use it? We can use the samples right?

So generally speaking WR makes a good point because of the whole "buy a man a fish and teach a man to fish" thing, what is the point if we do not grow?

But the question was about the law and I think instead of in general as WR says, gs directly answers the question at hand.

However, if the op is really concerned spend a few dollars and talk to a lawyer...

[kitkonis]

you boys! one question. what if you make loops with modified patches of sample based vst-s like nexus? but with my notes and with my modified arpeggio. is this legal? because it is sample based synth...

[ghettosynth]

you boys! one question. what if you make loops with modified patches of sample based vst-s like nexus? but with my notes and with my modified arpeggio. is this legal? because it is sample based synth...

Certainly, if you have a licence to do so, otherwise, no. As should be clear from my posts, there is a bright line rule for sampling audio and it's only for sampling audio. You cannot use any part of a recorded performance without permission.

[kitkonis]

you boys! one question. what if you make loops with modified patches of sample based vst-s like nexus? but with my notes and with my modified arpeggio. is this legal? because it is sample based synth...

Certainly, if you have a licence to do so, otherwise, no. As should be clear from my posts, there is a bright line rule for sampling audio and it's only for sampling audio. You cannot use any part of a recorded performance without permission.

tnx, I have sent a ticket to refx, lets see what they will say about this. as soon I get the answer I will post.

[Rajah]

you boys! one question. what if you make loops with modified patches of sample based vst-s like nexus? but with my notes and with my modified arpeggio. is this legal? because it is sample based synth...

Certainly, if you have a licence to do so, otherwise, no. As should be clear from my posts, there is a bright line rule for sampling audio and it's only for sampling audio. You cannot use any part of a recorded performance without permission.

Trilian has a clause in it's manual stating that you cannot use it (Trilian) for creating commercial Sample CD, etc.

[ghettosynth]

you boys! one question. what if you make loops with modified patches of sample based vst-s like nexus? but with my notes and with my modified arpeggio. is this legal? because it is sample based synth...

Certainly, if you have a licence to do so, otherwise, no. As should be clear from my posts, there is a bright line rule for sampling audio and it's only for sampling audio. You cannot use any part of a recorded performance without permission.

Trilian has a clause in it's manual stating that you cannot use it (Trilian) for creating commercial Sample CD, etc.

Right, so to be clear, when I said "license", I didn't mean simply that you purchased a synth and now you have a license, I mean specifically that you have a license that grants you permission to use it in a sample library.

Virtually all sample libraries and sample based synths grant you only a licence to use their samples in music production. To use such a product to make a commercial sound library you would have to obtain a different license. I was being a bit facetious BTW, most major vendors will not grant you such a license.

[kitkonis]

what about massive, sylenth, gladiator, diva?? dont tell me you cant use them for making loops ? i though only sample based vst-s permitt you to use the sounds in a sample cd ? I would be very happy if someone answered... thanks

i hope i can use them because if i cannot then I can go to WC and record the sounds when i flush the wc

[ghettosynth]

what about massive, sylenth, gladiator, diva?? dont tell me you cant use them for making loops ? i though only sample based vst-s permitt you to use the sounds in a sample cd ? I would be very happy if someone answered... thanks

i hope i can use them because if i cannot then I can go to WC and record the sounds when i flush the wc

So I don't know what's in gladiator or sylenth, I presume that they are both VA instruments.

There are no samples in Diva, AFAIK.

Massive is also a VA, so I doubt there's any issue, but, and this is a point that I think drives home that there should be a de-minimis defense for audio, it is a wavetable VA AFAIK, and, as such, uses single cycle "samples" in its oscillator core.

I'm pretty sure that nobody cares and most vendors view such synths as VA synths, hence, imminently sample-able, but, strictly speaking, even a single sample requires a license. This would probably never go to court precisely because it might be exactly what's needed to reverse the previous ruling, but, the KVR locals are quite often pedantic about this particular issue.

So, yes, you can sample Massive, but strictly speaking, it might not be legal.

[kitkonis]

so boys I have news about nexus:

Hi again,

You can certainly create your own distinct melodies using Nexus2 sounds, and then re-sell these on a sample CD.

Please note, however, that these must be your own, distinct melodies. You may not re-sell:

- SQ (sequenced) sounds which are included with Nexus2 (pre-made SQ sounds)

- As-is, one-shot samples taken directly from Nexus2. You may not resell these, even if you modify the parameters.

- Melodies which can be broken down into their component parts by the end customer (ie. can be 'dissected' by individuals who purchase the sample CD).

- Melodies which contain long, sustained sounds (ie. sounds which can be easily broken down into their component parts by the end customer).

Please let me know if you have any further questions.

Regards,
Jessica

----------------------------------------------------------

so that means you are limited in some ares, you cant make some 4 bar loops with a decent slow melody...oh.. that sux, but you can make some fast patterns i think.. hm but where is this line? Which melody can be broken down? complicated stuff

[ghettosynth]

so boys I have news about nexus:
You can certainly create your own distinct melodies using Nexus2 sounds, and then re-sell these on a sample CD.

Oh, that thing . We're mostly talking about what's legal as opposed to different license agreements.

With samples, whatever their license agreement says, goes, most are similar, check your own license.

With non-sampled instruments, there may still be license restrictions, that doesn't mean that you are violating their copyright to do something that disagrees with them, for example, distributing samples of their presets.